For a system with Pt on surface (transition metal ) with CeO2 (insulator) as substrate, what would you recommend ISMEAR > 0 or ISMEAR = -5?
I tried calculating with ISMEAR = 1 and SIGMA = 0.01 to get the entropy below 1 meV. What I need is very accurate energies and local potentials, so I was thinking of switching to ISMEAR = -5, but with ISMEAR=1, I notice a great deal of relaxation which basically means that I cannot compromise on the force calculations. I am not worried so much about the computational cost (not resorting to hybrid calculations though), but what would you suggest if i wanted both accurate forces and accurate energies ?
ISMEAR - MP method versus tetrahedron
Moderators: Global Moderator, Moderator
-
askhetan
- Jr. Member
- Posts: 81
- Joined: Wed Sep 28, 2011 4:15 pm
- License Nr.: 5-1441
- Location: Germany
ISMEAR - MP method versus tetrahedron
Last edited by askhetan on Fri Dec 21, 2012 5:29 pm, edited 1 time in total.
In the end, one must accept realism. Saying otherwise would be a denial of incompleteness.
-
support_vasp
- Global Moderator
- Posts: 1817
- Joined: Mon Nov 18, 2019 11:00 am
Re: ISMEAR - MP method versus tetrahedron
Hi,
We're sorry that we didn’t answer your question. This does not live up to the quality of support that we aim to provide. The team has since expanded. If we can still help with your problem, please ask again in a new post, linking to this one, and we will answer as quickly as possible.
Best wishes,
VASP